Not having looked at the problem very closely, I notice the adverb is only ever passed <: and >. So, I think a potential simplification could come by instead conditionally negating the result of the comparison. That would let you replace (= -:@# u +/) with (m = ] = -:@# > +/) (where m is 0 or 1), which is easier to express tacitly and could even be rewritten as a verb.

(Or you could say u@:(] = ...), where u is either -. or ]. That would also be easy to make tacit, as it is just ]: @: (] = ...), but is obviously harder to make a verb out of.)

 -E

On Fri, 24 Dec 2021, Stefan Baumann wrote:

Hello Raul,
Not day 2 but the day 3 puzzle lead me to practicing the fold conjunction:

rd=: "."0;._2
]d=: rd 0 : 0
00100
11110
10110
10111
10101
01111
00111
11100
10000
11001
00010
01010
)
(*&#. -.) (-:@# < +/) d NB. (*) power consumption
NB. Rating adverb r: u=.<: oxygen generator, u=.> CO2 scrubber
r=: {{ x #.F..((] #~ [: (= -:@# u +/) {"1)^:(1<#@])) y }}
((<:r * >r) i.@{:@$) d  NB. (**) life support rating

Was only wondering if the r adverb could be written tacitly - currently
have a hard time understanding
these modifier trains...

Thanks. Stefan.




On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 5:35 PM Raul Miller <[email protected]> wrote:

previous message:
http://jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2021-December/059435.html
AoC day 3 details: https://adventofcode.com/2021/day/3

This is a somewhat cleaned up version of my AoC day 3 implementation.
(This was my first "midnight attempt" which lends itself to illegible
code.)

parse=: {{_".1j1#y}};._2
sample=: parse {{)n
00100
11110
10110
10111
10101
01111
00111
11100
10000
11001
00010
01010
}}

NB. "part a"
a3=: powerConsumption=:{{
  gamma=. (0.5 < +/%#) y
  (*&#. -.) gamma
}}

NB. "part b"
b3=: lifeSupportRating=:{{
  (<: filter y) *&#. > filter y
}}

NB. recursive
filter=:{{
  if. 1=#y do. ,y return.end.
  bits=. {."1 y
  bit=. (0.5 u +/%#) bits
  if. 1 < {:$y do.
    bit,u filter (bit=bits)#}."1 y
  else.
    bit
  end.
}}

The part b puzzle smells an awful lot like a median or mode
calculation, and there might be a simpler approach.

Nothing fancy here, but it works...

--
Raul
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to